Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
billion of that is out of national defense and $30 billion of that at the domestic discretionary -- $50 billion of that is out of national defense and $50 billion of that is domestic discretionary. will the republicans keep obama on a short leash and give him an allowance every month in return for better behavior or will they give him a debt ceiling that goes along time? what will happen? one option is looked to history. two years ago we faced exactly this situation, the 2001 2003 tax cuts all lapsed. we had a republican house coming in, and democratic senate and democratic president. why would that not the way you do? obama says i will hold my breath until i turn blue and stamp my feet. 2 years ago he said he did not want to raise taxes on small businesses because it would damage the economy. now he thinks this economy is stronger than it was two years ago and we are in better shape to take the economic hit. it is an interesting question. if you go over the tax cliff and taxes are raised dramatically, the house would have our past -- will already have passed. on the sequester, i though
is education is part of the pot of money that is called non-defense discretionary. it has become the easiest part to cut because they can say hills with cutting that money, but they do not have to identify what is being -- they can say, we will cut that money, but they do not have to live in the phi what is being cut. -- identify what is being cut. the small of the pot gets, the less likely it is to get an increase. i agree. we are talking about children and money targeted to hide poverty areas. those are the voices that do not have as much political power as other voices on what happens in congress. >> our hope is that with these demographic change we are seeing out there that the broader population will understand that this really is about investment. it is not about spending any more. when you have a 20% gap in educational attainment between white and 9-white kids, which is bad enough -- non-white kids, which is bad enough -- imagine in 10 years when the non-white kids are going to be 40%. i think there is more and more a link in the thinking between what is happening today and what happe
conferences around the budget control act. this created sequestration. that is split 50-50 between defense and non-defense spending. >> in january, our first week that we were sworn into office, the present as for the increase in the debt ceiling and i made it clear that there would not be an increase in the debt ceiling without changes to the way that we spend the american people's money. shortly after that i was in new york. we agreed that there should be no taxes, as part of this agreement. but we have been able to achieve, we met those to standards that have been outlined. it is time for america to deal with the spending problem. we have listened to the american people, and make sure that we cannot get into the spot again. this is the the shot in the 20 years i have been here to build support for a budget -- a balanced budget. this is sorely needed, we have never gotten ourselves into the mess that we are in. this is important for the fiscal future but also for the fact that our economy needs to get going. beginning to take steps to fixing the fiscal problems, the people we expect to r
the defense of marriage act and i think the first would be a very solid foundation for a supreme court ruling. it will issue some kind of result next june. the final question is the pairing question, the proposition a question. does the u.s. constitution requires states to recognize same-sex marriages? mclean suggested and i argued in 1996 that the constitution as a matter of principle does prohibit such discrimination. the question is not as the constitution prohibit it? i think that is the right answer and i believe that is the answer people will have to reach as a society at some point. the real question is, do we want the u.s. supreme court to reach that result in 2013 by taking review and ruling as broadly as judge walker ruled, or do we want the supreme court to rule more narrowly? or perhaps the best result is for the supreme court to deny the review and send it back to have the ninth circuit reaffirm its and have same-sex marriage licenses start issuing in california again. this is an issue whose outcome is inevitable, but it is not inevitable that the answer will be delivered in 2013
, having those ties helps us in defense issues and other things. we are not doing that now. >> one of the easiest places to get republican support for a new agenda, so maybe it, we get it right, but -- what would a new american renewal agenda be comprised of? >> let's negotiate a trade agreement. president obama is the first president to not negotiate one. >> south korea. >> they were negotiated in the previous administration. we have an opportunity right now in europe and asia to knock down barriers, tariff and non- tariff barriers and you would get overwhelming support for that. it would have been tougher in the first term. this is a time to move on from that. the only point i would disagree with my goal is the just mentioned europe and japan have the in much worse than we did. we need to help our current largest trading partners getting it right by knocking down these barriers to we can engage china and the other emerging markets in a way to serve everyone's best interests. >> what would you think about this as a possible secretary of commerce. >> the world still in of these the
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5